Compared implementation of the long-acting buprenorphine treatment buvidal in four European countries.

BACKGROUND: Buvidal is the only depot buprenorphine currently available in Europe. Buvidal offers a new treatment paradigm, which may require some adjustment in the national regulatory frameworks for opioid agonist treatments (OATs), as well as the national care systems. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data on the national dissemination of Buvidal, types of populations treated, and the national regulatory framework and care organization system through which Buvidal has been implemented were compared between the UK, Finland, Spain, and France, using a qualitative survey. RESULTS: In 2022, the proportion of people on OAT who received Buvidal was 2.1% in the UK, 60-65% in Finland, 1% in Spain, and 0.3% in France. In both Finland and the UK, the cost of the medication is covered by the national health system, whereas, in Spain and France, Buvidal is accessible only in specialized centers, which must carry its cost. Other national features may explain the gaps in Buvidal use, including the baseline level of OAT coverage, which was high in both France and Spain. CONCLUSIONS: Important national discrepancies are found regarding Buvidal dissemination among people on OAT.

Negotiating an Illicit Economy in the Time of COVID-19: Selling and Buying Dilemmas in the Lives of People Who Use Drugs in Scotland.

The impact of COVID-19 itself and societal responses to it have affected people who use drugs and the illicit drug economy. This paper is part of a project investigating the health impacts of COVID-19 related control measures on people who use drugs in Scotland. It examines their roles and decisions as economically situated actors. It does this within a moral economy perspective that places economic decisions and calculations within a context of the network of social obligations and moral decisions. The paper uses a mixed methods approach, reporting on a drug trend survey and in-depth interviews with people who use drugs. It finds they were affected by restrictions in the drug consumption context and changes in the supply context, both in terms of what was supplied and changes in the relationship between sellers and buyers. Face to face selling became more fraught. Participants in more economically precarious circumstances were faced with dilemmas about whether to move into drug selling. The double impact of loss of income and reduced access to support networks were particularly difficult for them. Despite the perception that the pandemic had increased the power of sellers in relation to their customers, many full-time sellers were reported to be keeping their prices stable in order to maintain their relationships with customers, instead extending credit or adulterating their products. The effect of spatial controls on movement during the pandemic also meant that the digital divide became more apparent. People with good access to digital markets and easy drug delivery through apps were in a better position to manage disruption to drug sales contexts. We make recommendations in relation to how policy can respond to the interests of people who use drugs in a pandemic.

A peer-delivered intervention to reduce harm and improve the well-being of homeless people with problem substance use: the SHARPS feasibility mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: For people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use, access to appropriate services can be challenging. There is evidence that development of trusting relationships with non-judgemental staff can facilitate service engagement. Peer-delivered approaches show particular promise, but the evidence base is still developing. This study tested the feasibility and acceptability of a peer-delivered intervention, through 'Peer Navigators', to support people who are homeless with problem substance use to address a range of health and social issues. OBJECTIVES: The study objectives were to design and implement a peer-delivered, relational intervention to reduce harms and improve health/well-being, quality of life and social functioning for people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use, and to conduct a concurrent process evaluation to inform a future randomised controlled trial. DESIGN: A mixed-methods feasibility study with concurrent process evaluation was conducted, involving qualitative interviews [staff interviews (one time point), n = 12; Peer Navigator interviews (three or four time points), n = 15; intervention participant interviews: first time point, n = 24, and second time point, n = 10], observations and quantitative outcome measures. SETTING: The intervention was delivered in three outreach services for people who are homeless in Scotland, and three Salvation Army hostels in England; there were two standard care settings: an outreach service in Scotland and a hostel in England. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use (n = 68) (intervention). INTERVENTION: This was a peer-delivered, relational intervention drawing on principles of psychologically informed environments, with Peer Navigators providing practical and emotional support. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes relating to participants' substance use, participants' physical and mental health needs, and the quality of Peer Navigator relationships were measured via a 'holistic health check', with six questionnaires completed at two time points: a specially created sociodemographic, health and housing status questionnaire; the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 items plus the Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7; the Maudsley Addiction Profile; the Substance Use Recovery Evaluator; the RAND Corporation Short Form survey-36 items; and the Consultation and Relational Empathy Measure. RESULTS: The Supporting Harm Reduction through Peer Support (SHARPS) study was found to be acceptable to, and feasible for, intervention participants, staff and Peer Navigators. Among participants, there was reduced drug use and an increase in the number of prescriptions for opioid substitution therapy. There were reductions in risky injecting practice and risky sexual behaviour. Participants reported improvements to service engagement and felt more equipped to access services on their own. The lived experience of the Peer Navigators was highlighted as particularly helpful, enabling the development of trusting, authentic and meaningful relationships. The relationship with the Peer Navigator was measured as excellent at baseline and follow-up. Some challenges were experienced in relation to the 'fit' of the intervention within some settings and will inform future studies. LIMITATIONS: Some participants did not complete the outcome measures, or did not complete both sets, meaning that we do not have baseline and/or follow-up data for all. The standard care data sample sizes make comparison between settings limited. CONCLUSIONS: A randomised controlled trial is recommended to assess the effectiveness of the Peer Navigator intervention. FUTURE WORK: A definitive cluster randomised controlled trial should particularly consider setting selection, outcomes and quantitative data collection instruments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered as ISRCTN15900054. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 14. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

People who are homeless have worse physical and mental health, and higher rates of drug/alcohol (substance) use, than the general population. For people experiencing these challenges, completely stopping the use of substances can be difficult. Harm reduction services can be useful in reducing risks. Approaches delivered by people who have had similar experiences (peers) are also promising. Some research has highlighted the importance of trusting relationships with service staff. More research is needed on how all of these should work with people who are homeless and who use substances. This study consisted of four 'Peer Navigators' providing practical and emotional support to a group of people who are homeless and use substances to help improve their quality of life and health. The Peer Navigators had similar past experiences. The Peer Navigators were hired, and worked with around 15 'participants' each, for 2­12 months. They were based in third-sector homelessness residential and outreach services in Scotland and England. The Peer Navigators developed relationships with participants. They worked with (and often accompanied) them to access services, such as substance use treatment, health care, housing and welfare/benefits. The Peer Navigators had access to a small budget to pay for essentials, including food and bus fares. The relationship between the Peer Navigators and participants was most important, so the Peer Navigators spent time getting to know and listening to them. The aim was to understand if this intervention could be delivered to individuals experiencing these challenges. This study was not designed to know if the intervention worked; a larger study is needed for that. Despite some challenges, the participants were able to make positive changes to their lives, and they valued working with their Peer Navigator. The Peer Navigators enjoyed their roles and staff generally supported the intervention. The next step is to conduct more research to assess if this intervention can make a difference.

Why are drug-related deaths among women increasing in Scotland? A mixed-methods analysis of possible explanations.

Drug-related deaths have increased significantly in Scotland in recent years, with a much greater percentage increase in deaths among women than among men. We undertook a mixed-methods project to identify explanations for this trend, comprising three parallel methodological strands: (i) an analysis of available routine data, including drug treatment data, death registrations, and surveys of people using needle exchanges; (ii) thematic analysis of interviews and focus groups with professional stakeholders and (iii) secondary analysis of interviews with women who use drugs. Results indicated that the observed trend is likely to reflect multiple, interacting causes. Potential contributors identified were: ageing; changing patterns of substance use; increasing prevalence of physical and mental health co-morbidities; changing relationships and parenting roles; changes to treatment services and wider health and social care provision; unintended consequences or poor implementation of recovery-oriented practice; and changes in the social security system. Policy responses to rising drug-related death rates require a gender-informed approach, recognising the commonalities and differences between men and women who use drugs; the diversity of experiences within each gender; and the intersections between gender and other forms of inequality, such as poverty.

Survey modes comparison in contingent valuation: Internet panels and mail surveys.

Stated preferences methods are extensively applied in health economics to elicit preferences. Although mailed surveys were commonly used to collect data, internet panel (IP) surveys are being increasingly used. This raises questions about the validity of responses and estimated willingness-to-pay (WTP) values generated from IP surveys. We conduct the first study in health to compare a contingent valuation IP survey with a mailed survey using the electoral roll. Our IP has a higher response rate and lower item missing response rate. The difference is reduced but remains when restricting comparisons with valid WTPs. Sample characteristics differ, with significant differences between modes for gender, age, income, and attitudes and knowledge. Although difference in WTP values exist, with the IP resulting in higher values, we find limited evidence that such differences are statistically significant. The mail survey has lower initial cost per response; however, once restricting samples to valid WTP responses with nonmissing respondent information, the cost per response across modes is similar. Our results, suggesting that IPs generate valid and cost-effective values, are encouraging as researchers move increasingly to IPs to collect preference data.

Pharmacist services for non-hospitalised patients.

BACKGROUND: This review focuses on non-dispensing services from pharmacists, i.e. pharmacists in community, primary or ambulatory-care settings, to non-hospitalised patients, and is an update of a previously-published Cochrane Review. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effect of pharmacists' non-dispensing services on non-hospitalised patient outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases and two trial registers in March 2015, together with reference checking and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. We included non-English language publications. We ran top-up searches in January 2018 and have added potentially eligible studies to 'Studies awaiting classification'. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of pharmacist services compared with the delivery of usual care or equivalent/similar services with the same objective delivered by other health professionals. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures of Cochrane and the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group. Two review authors independently checked studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risks of bias. We evaluated the overall certainty of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included 116 trials comprising 111 trials (39,729 participants) comparing pharmacist interventions with usual care and five trials (2122 participants) comparing pharmacist services with services from other healthcare professionals. Of the 116 trials, 76 were included in meta-analyses. The 40 remaining trials were not included in the meta-analyses because they each reported unique outcome measures which could not be combined. Most trials targeted chronic conditions and were conducted in a range of settings, mostly community pharmacies and hospital outpatient clinics, and were mainly but not exclusively conducted in high-income countries. Most trials had a low risk of reporting bias and about 25%-30% were at high risk of bias for performance, detection, and attrition. Selection bias was unclear for about half of the included studies.Compared with usual care, we are uncertain whether pharmacist services reduce the percentage of patients outside the glycated haemoglobin target range (5 trials, N = 558, odds ratio (OR) 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 2.22; very low-certainty evidence). Pharmacist services may reduce the percentage of patients whose blood pressure is outside the target range (18 trials, N = 4107, OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.55; low-certainty evidence) and probably lead to little or no difference in hospital attendance or admissions (14 trials, N = 3631, OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.11; moderate-certainty evidence). Pharmacist services may make little or no difference to adverse drug effects (3 trials, N = 590, OR 1.65, 95% CI 0.84 to 3.24) and may slightly improve physical functioning (7 trials, N = 1329, mean difference (MD) 5.84, 95% CI 1.21 to 10.48; low-certainty evidence). Pharmacist services may make little or no difference to mortality (9 trials, N = 1980, OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.12, low-certaintly evidence).Of the five studies that compared services delivered by pharmacists with other health professionals, no studies evaluated the impact of the intervention on the percentage of patients outside blood pressure or glycated haemoglobin target range, hospital attendance and admission, adverse drug effects, or physical functioning. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that pharmacist services have varying effects on patient outcomes compared with usual care. We found no studies comparing services delivered by pharmacists with other healthcare professionals that evaluated the impact of the intervention on the six main outcome measures. The results need to be interpreted cautiously because there was major heterogeneity in study populations, types of interventions delivered and reported outcomes.There was considerable heterogeneity within many of the meta-analyses, as well as considerable variation in the risks of bias.

'You are still a human being, you still have needs, you still have wants': a qualitative exploration of patients' experiences and views of HIV support.

Background: The importance of patient involvement in service redesign is gaining increasing recognition, particularly for chronic conditions. This study explored the experience, views and needs of people living with HIV to identify areas for improvement and service development. Methods: Face-to-face, semi-structured interviews were conducted with people living with HIV being treated in two clinics in Grampian, Scotland. The topic guide was developed, based on a proposed care pathway, which emphasized support systems. Thematic analysis was undertaken. Results: A total of 14 people living with HIV participated, with time since diagnosis ranging from <1 to >15 years. Most were males, white British and were men who had sex with men. Interviewees highlighted the need for different types of support throughout different stages of the HIV journey, including timely provision of information, post-diagnosis follow-up support, peer support, family support, and support regarding employment, benefits and housing. Many interviewees expressed a preference for support to be provided by people with knowledge or experience of HIV but had mixed feelings towards group support. Interviewees reported concerns with confidentiality and potential stigmatization. Conclusions: Support services should be tailored to reflect changing needs throughout the HIV journey with particular emphasis on maximizing confidentiality whilst minimizing stigma.

Resilience of primary healthcare professionals working in challenging environments: a focus group study.

BACKGROUND: The modern primary healthcare workforce needs to be resilient. Early research framed professional resilience as avoiding 'burnout'; however, more recent literature has introduced the concept of positive adaptation to professional challenges, which results in individuals thriving in their role. AIM: To explore what primary health professionals working in challenging environments consider to be characteristics of resilience and what promotes or challenges professional resilience. DESIGN AND SETTING: A qualitative focus group in north east Scotland. METHOD: Five focus groups were held with 20 health professionals (six GPs, nine nurses, four pharmacists, and a practice manager) based in rural or deprived city areas in the north east of Scotland. Inductive thematic analysis identified emerging themes. RESULTS: Personal resilience characteristics identified were optimism, flexibility and adaptability, initiative, tolerance, organisational skills, being a team worker, keeping within professional boundaries, assertiveness, humour, and a sense of self-worth. Workplace challenges were workload, information overload, time pressures, poor communication, challenging patients, and environmental factors (rural location). Promoters of professional resilience were strong management support, teamwork, workplace buffers, and social factors such as friends, family, and leisure activities. CONCLUSION: A model of health professional resilience is proposed that concurs with existing literature but adds the concept of personal traits being synergistic with workplace features and social networks. These facilitate adaptability and enable individual health professionals to cope with adversity that is inevitably part of the everyday experience of those working in challenging healthcare environments.

Engaging the citizenship of the homeless-a qualitative study of specialist primary care providers.

BACKGROUND: Homeless patients have complex health needs. They also often describe difficulty accessing and maintaining access to clinical services. Although engagement with health care has been explored from the patient perspective, little is known about how health care professionals conceptualize, assess and promote engagement with health care among homeless persons. AIM: To examine how health professionals working in services for homeless persons view their patients' engagement with health care and explore how these views influence their practice. METHODS: Semi-structured phone interviews were conducted with health professionals who had experience working with homeless patients. Purposive sampling aimed to cover a range of location, practice type and duration of professional experience. Thematic analysis was undertaken on interview transcripts. RESULTS: Thirteen interviews were conducted. Four themes were explored relating to engagement of homeless persons with health care: (i) systematic barriers to engagement; (ii) difficulties engaging with professionals; (iii) system approaches to facilitate engagement and (iv) relationship approaches to facilitate engagement. In addition, a fifth theme emerged relating to the interaction between practices and networks of homeless persons in which practices were perceived as a key resource for a citizenship of the homeless. CONCLUSION: Primary care practices providing services for homeless people aim to promote engagement with health care by maximizing flexibility and fostering relationships between patients and the clinical team. In doing so they produce a paradox, whereby they function as a key hub within a citizenship of homeless persons while simultaneously aiming to help people move out of homelessness into a more settled state.

Reducing drug related deaths: a pre-implementation assessment of knowledge, barriers and enablers for naloxone distribution through general practice.

BACKGROUND: The Scottish Naloxone Programme aims to reduce Scotland's high number of drug-related deaths (DRDs) caused by opiate overdose. It is currently implemented through specialist drug services but General Practitioners (GPs) are likely to have contact with drug using patients and their families and are therefore in an ideal position to direct them to naloxone schemes, or provide it themselves. This research gathered baseline data on GP's knowledge of and willingness to be involved in DRD prevention, including naloxone administration, prior to the implementation of primary care based delivery. METHODS: Mixed methods were used comprising a quantitative, postal survey and qualitative telephone interviews. A questionnaire was sent to 500 GPs across Scotland. An initial mailing was followed by a reminder. A shortened questionnaire containing seven key questions was posted as a final reminder. Telephone interviews were conducted with 17 GPs covering a range of demographic characteristics and drug user experience. RESULTS: A response rate of 55% (240/439) was achieved. There was some awareness of the naloxone programme but little involvement (3.3%), 9% currently provided routine overdose prevention, there was little involvement in displaying overdose prevention information (<20%). Knowledge of DRD risk was mixed. There was tentative willingness to be involved in naloxone prescribing with half of respondents willing to provide this to drug users or friends/family. However half were uncertain GP based naloxone provision was essential to reduce DRDs.Factors enabling naloxone distribution were: evidence of effectiveness, appropriate training, and adding to the local formulary. Interviewees had limited awareness of what naloxone distribution in primary care may involve and considered naloxone supply as a specialist service rather than a core GP role. Wider attitudinal barriers to involvement with this group were expressed. CONCLUSIONS: There was poor awareness of the Scottish National Naloxone Programme in participants. Results indicated GPs did not currently feel sufficiently skilled or knowledgeable to be involved in naloxone provision. Appropriate training was identified as a key requirement.

Management of drug misuse: an 8-year follow-up survey of Scottish GPs.

This study repeated a Scotland-wide survey of one-in-four GPs from 2000, to compare findings with 2008. A 60% response was achieved (of 1065). Almost 44% of GPs were treating drug misusers (62% in 2000). Enhanced services were provided by less than half of practices. Seven per cent of responders were only comfortable prescribing below the recommended minimum dose of 60 mg methadone, (33% in 2000). Over 70% offered blood-borne virus screening and 71% were aware of patients using psychostimulants. Recent changes, particularly the new GP contract may have decreased GP involvement in treating drug misusers.

Pharmaco-economics of community maintenance for opiate dependence: a review of evidence and methodology.

This literature review synthesizes and appraises evidence on the pharmaco-economic value of community maintenance for opiate dependence. Included studies enrolled opiate-dependent subjects aged 18 years or over participating in a community maintenance programme. Cost-effectiveness/cost-utility analyses provided some evidence supporting the value of methadone maintenance in combination with psychosocial services and of heroin co-prescription. Evidence on the pharmaco-economic profile of maintenance with buprenorphine as compared with methadone is mixed. Few studies carried out an economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial and studies adopting a modelling approach suffered from problems with the quality and validity of parameter estimates. Studies were also limited in the range of costs and consequences considered. The cost-benefit literature showed positive net benefits from community maintenance programmes. A longer length of stay of subjects in methadone maintenance was associated with greater reductions in criminal activity. However, measurement of benefits was limited to savings from reduced crime rates. Health benefits were rarely considered. Cost-benefit studies based on a before-and-after comparison were not able to consider the impact of treatment on mortality of opiate-dependent subjects. There is a need for better-designed economic evaluations that examine whether treatment benefits exceed costs, in terms of both financial benefits and health gain.